Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

So, to change the subject, as Sithappens tried to a few days ago with limited success, what do y'all think about road tax being applied by distance travelled? Despite being a fairly high mileage user, I'd be all for it subject to it being possible to apply it fairly.

To quote some internet news page or other ' A public transport charity has called upon chancellor Rachel Reeves to impose a 'pay-per-mile' scheme on British drivers, days after motoring service company RAC described such a scheme as ‘the way forward’.

But what is a ‘pay-per-mile’ scheme, and how would it work in Britain?

‘Pay-per-mile’ schemes (also known as ‘road pricing’) have been discussed due to an increasing shortfall in fuel duty due to the adoption of electric vehicles. Duties levied on petrol, diesel and other fuels currently generate around £25 billion a year in revenue for the Treasury.

‘Road pricing’ or ‘pay-per-mile’ has been successfully used in countries such as Singapore for decades, and New Zealand has a system where some vehicles pay for road miles in advance in units of 1,000km, with similar systems being trialed in Europe for goods vehicles.

However, previous governments have shunned the idea of introducing such a scheme in the UK.'

Anyone?

I guess in a way it does exist as the more mileage you do the more fuel duty you pay, or equivalent on EV vehicles.

I don't know how it would be measured, would cars need some sort of meter to report on mileage completed. Or would it just be on major roads like motorways?

[Trickytreesreds]

so, how's it going then by tumbling ratings and broken promises already.
(before you jump on the defensive RA, you called out the Tories for lying)

same old, same old . I'll say again, he'll be gone before a year in office. If it isn't on a crib sheet, he's screwed.

https://fb.watch/umpXjWJvPE/

[Trickytreesreds]

This is a deep hole, that Labour are about to fall in and need to be very careful here. Rayner couldn't define Islamophobia and says they are going to put it into a definition.
This could be very dangerous and fuel radical islam very easily. This country has free speech and the right to criticise. Iran were the ones who pushed the Islamophobia excuse, after criticism of the way that country treats certain sections of society.
So the blasphemy law trap could be sprung here very easily. NO RELIGION IS BEYOND CRITICISM.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/angela-rayner-kemi-badenoch-government-keir-starmer-conservative-b1179621.html

I'll break it down myself.
1. ISLAM- a sectarian religion, that by definition treats women as second class citizens/ demonises gays/trans/apostates/Jews. Takes its teachings too literally which causes radical elements to use extreme violence in the form of knife attacks, shootings, bombings.

2. PHOBIA- an irrational fear

For irrational, see point one.

Tread very carefully Ms Rayner

[Geoff Parkstone]

I guess in a way it does exist as the more mileage you do the more fuel duty you pay, or equivalent on EV vehicles.

I don't know how it would be measured, would cars need some sort of meter to report on mileage completed. Or would it just be on major roads like motorways?

Surely the answer is to charge a flat rate of, say £ 50 and then increase petrol / diesel tax by an amount to reflect additional RFD component? That way it's sort of self reporting although perhaps unfair on the "gas guzzlers".

[Andy_Faber]

I guess in a way it does exist as the more mileage you do the more fuel duty you pay, or equivalent on EV vehicles.

I don't know how it would be measured, would cars need some sort of meter to report on mileage completed. Or would it just be on major roads like motorways?

The issue hmg have (any party) is that the move ev they push the less fuel sold so the less duty and an ev consumes (something like) the same road resources as an old banger. As someone who’s family fleet are all non-ULEZ guzzlers I’m fine paying a climate change premium but am also aware that if/when I go ev I’ll still be grinding up the highway etc

No idea what the tech solution will be, a network of ANPR cameras Mebbee?

[Andy_Faber]

Surely the answer is to charge a flat rate of, say £ 50 and then increase petrol / diesel tax by an amount to reflect additional RFD component? That way it's sort of self reporting although perhaps unfair on the "gas guzzlers".

Up to a point I’m in happy to suck it up ( the cost not the actual fuel although, thinking about it hmm…)

[ramAnag]

This is a deep hole, that Labour are about to fall in and need to be very careful here. Rayner couldn't define Islamophobia and says they are going to put it into a definition.
This could be very dangerous and fuel radical islam very easily. This country has free speech and the right to criticise. Iran were the ones who pushed the Islamophobia excuse, after criticism of the way that country treats certain sections of society.
So the blasphemy law trap could be sprung here very easily. NO RELIGION IS BEYOND CRITICISM.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/angela-rayner-kemi-badenoch-government-keir-starmer-conservative-b1179621.html

I'll break it down myself.
1. ISLAM- a sectarian religion, that by definition treats women as second class citizens/ demonises gays/trans/apostates/Jews. Takes its teachings too literally which causes radical elements to use extreme violence in the form of knife attacks, shootings, bombings.

2. PHOBIA- an irrational fear

For irrational, see point one.

Tread very carefully Ms Rayner

Jeez, in other words, having no answers to the identification of his pet project, Brexit, as a complete failure and having had his claim that immigration is the nation’s number one concern exposed as nonsense, Tricky swaps to his other hobby horse…Islamophobia.
Here we go again!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Jeez, in other words, having no answers to the identification of his pet project, Brexit, as a complete failure and having had his claim that immigration is the nation’s number one concern exposed as nonsense, Tricky swaps to his other hobby horse…Islamophobia.
Here we go again!

If you didn't keep reacting in your usual predictable way maybe your torment of tricky posts might go away?? Even he can't argue with himself....

[MadAmster]

IMO, it's the lack of the possibility to apply for asylum whilst abroad, in most cases is what triggers the supply of people willing to pay the "small boat owners". It would appear, according to some on here, that there is still the odd possibility of posting an asylum claim from abroad.

Those claimants will have their fingerprints and photo taken. If turned down and they still want to come, and most will, surely they will go down the small boat route.

This would suggest that, even with asylum offices "open in the region", the supply of "small boat customers" wouldn't dry up but would only reduce. Those successful with their claim would come here legally. Those whose claims were turned down would still come by boat.

Reopening the asylum offices would possibly reduce immigration in the short term but long term, I now think that successful asylum seekers plus the boat people would roughly equal the current numbers of boat people.

Basically, those determined to come here, will find a way, come hell or high water. A new thought to me as I previously thought reopening asylum offices abroad would solve the boat problem. I now think that it would work short term but those refused would find, when they got to Blighty, that their fingerprints and mugshots are in the "system" and they'd be immediately sent back. Others who know they have little chance of asylum would decide against applying and simply go down the boat route and throw all ID away...

Maybe bring in a rule of "no ID, it's straight back to France with you"...

[SithHappens]

The issue hmg have (any party) is that the move ev they push the less fuel sold so the less duty and an ev consumes (something like) the same road resources as an old banger. As someone who’s family fleet are all non-ULEZ guzzlers I’m fine paying a climate change premium but am also aware that if/when I go ev I’ll still be grinding up the highway etc

No idea what the tech solution will be, a network of ANPR cameras Mebbee?

For me it depends what the goal is. Is it to raise money or encourage us to be greener.

Public transport doesn't seem to be a reliable or cost effective solution for most, its a while since I regularly traveled on trains for work but it was costly back then. Even now if we go to London for a weekend it's considerably cheaper to drive to luton and get the train from there than go from Derby.

At this point in my life it wouldn't make much difference, my annual mileage is circa 2000 and that's at a push, of course that could change but I hope not.

Whatever they do that increases the cost of travel is likely to be inflationary as there will be knock on costs, if my wife's haulage business have to raise costs then so do their customers and ultimately it's passed on to the likes of Joe bloggs.

[MadAmster]

Currently, the Birmingham International to Derby return, off peak, train tickets I buy when I'm over for a game are now £26 and that's including a reserved seat. Personally, I don't think that's excessive. Peak time, reserved seat returns are £52 and I do find that excessive.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Currently, the Birmingham International to Derby return, off peak, train tickets I buy when I'm over for a game are now £26 and that's including a reserved seat. Personally, I don't think that's excessive. Peak time, reserved seat returns are £52 and I do find that excessive.

If I need to go to London off-peak return it'll set me back about a tenner. Fair price.

If I needed to be there to start work at 9pm, then £30. (Although with an annual season ticket maybe 10-15% less)

On peak, no reserveable seats and more often than not, standing room only. Then there are the delays, busted connections and around 1 in 4 cancelled - and over a year of industrial action by selfish Luddite drivers still going on.

Thank the Lord I stopped the daily commute many moons ago.

[SithHappens]

On the subject of small boats, it's absolutely tragic that so many have died today. Whatever the rights or wrong they must be totally desperate to escape the lives they had to try and get a better future to put themselves at such risk.

Must be awful to be in that position.

[Trickytreesreds]

Jeez, in other words, having no answers to the identification of his pet project, Brexit, as a complete failure and having had his claim that immigration is the nation’s number one concern exposed as nonsense, Tricky swaps to his other hobby horse…Islamophobia.
Here we go again!

Oh no you don't. This thread is about the election and the now current government. You loved bringing up every topic you could find on the Tories. Islamophobia is being banded about like mad at the moment and this government has now backed itself into a corner over it. I get you don't want to talk about it, as it makes you twitch. But explain themselves they will.
Funny how up to yet, Government priorities seem to be Paying out to their union paymasters/ having a go at smokers/ picking on pensioners and now the latest rants are sorting out islamophobia and having a go at the Israeli, government
The truth always outs itself. Tick tock.

[Trickytreesreds]

IMO, it's the lack of the possibility to apply for asylum whilst abroad, in most cases is what triggers the supply of people willing to pay the "small boat owners". It would appear, according to some on here, that there is still the odd possibility of posting an asylum claim from abroad.

Those claimants will have their fingerprints and photo taken. If turned down and they still want to come, and most will, surely they will go down the small boat route.

This would suggest that, even with asylum offices "open in the region", the supply of "small boat customers" wouldn't dry up but would only reduce. Those successful with their claim would come here legally. Those whose claims were turned down would still come by boat.

Reopening the asylum offices would possibly reduce immigration in the short term but long term, I now think that successful asylum seekers plus the boat people would roughly equal the current numbers of boat people.

Basically, those determined to come here, will find a way, come hell or high water. A new thought to me as I previously thought reopening asylum offices abroad would solve the boat problem. I now think that it would work short term but those refused would find, when they got to Blighty, that their fingerprints and mugshots are in the "system" and they'd be immediately sent back. Others who know they have little chance of asylum would decide against applying and simply go down the boat route and throw all ID away...

Maybe bring in a rule of "no ID, it's straight back to France with you"...

I would agree with most of that. They come by boat, knowing damned well they wouldn't qualify through any usual route. They throw their ID papers away, making it nearly impossible to remove them by legal channels.
So, doing what you suggest, then yes let them apply abroad. If accepted , full ID registration. Anyone not coming this way, gets deported immediately . No reprieve/ legal card played.
This bonkers government has to do something fast. The projected bill for this lot, is expected to surpass £10 B by next year.
He removed Rwanda, yet has still done nothing in his "smash the gangs plan" . Not appointed his immigration guru, nor set up his task foce either.